Democratic attorneys general from more than a dozen states have asked a federal court to enforce an injunction that they say bars the Department of Health and Human Services from sharing Medicaid records with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. They claim the Trump administration illegally transferred sensitive Medicaid information and want the judge to force explanations about what was shared and how it is being used. The dispute turns on privacy, immigration enforcement, and who gets to decide how federal data is handled.
The states say a court already blocked broad transfers of Medicaid data, and they filed a fresh complaint asking the Northern District of California to compel compliance. Their filing argues HHS crossed the line by sending a “large and complex” set of Medicaid records to ICE, which could include the information of lawful permanent residents and citizens. This is now a fight over whether national security checks and immigration enforcement can be balanced with privacy guarantees for program enrollees.
“The Trump Administration appears to be defying a direct court order blocking it from sharing the personal, sensitive data of individuals including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. It’s invasive — and deeply troubling,” said California Attorney General Bonta, who led the coalition of 22 states. “When Californians signed up for Medi-Cal, they did so with the understanding that their data would not be used for purposes unrelated to administering this program. I urge the court to enforce its earlier order and make clear that these guardrails exist for anyone who is lawfully residing in the United States.”
The complaint traces back to a lawsuit filed by California in July 2025, which accused HHS of engaging in a widespread transfer of sensitive Medicaid records belonging to both temporary and permanent residents. The states contend the sharing chills enrollment in legally available Medicaid programs, because people fear their health information could be used for immigration enforcement. That claim frames the legal challenge as one that blends privacy law with federal program administration.
SECOND FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS IRS FROM SHARING ADDRESSES WITH ICE
A judge ruled last December that certain categories of personal information cannot be collected or used against lawful permanent residents or citizens, while allowing limited collection from temporary-status residents. The decision drew a line between basic demographic data and sensitive health records, but the administration’s actions now raise questions about whether that boundary was respected. The states want the court to make the limits plain and to force disclosure of the dataset contents and the decision rules HHS used.
The attorneys general also press that HHS did not explain how it decides who is “lawfully present,” leaving enormous discretion in federal hands without a clear public standard. CATO Institute Senior Legal Fellow Dan Greenberg told Fox News Digital there is “a strong possibility” that HHS and ICE violated the district court’s order. That assessment helps justify the states’ demand for judicial oversight before the data is repurposed.
“The reason this is a strong possibility is that DHHS communications apparently indicate that it shared a ‘large and complex’ dataset of Medicaid recipients with ICE,” Greenberg said. “That phrase suggests that the dataset that was shared with ICE may have included information that is outside the scope of the court order. That is a question of fact: that is why the states are now asking the court to compel the federal government to explain just what was shared and how it is now being used.”
“The TMSIS identifies people who are only eligible for emergency Medicaid services, but the problem is that this class of people includes both undocumented and lawfully present immigrants,” Greenberg said. “In short, it is as if the court order said that only some of the information in one particular file should be disclosed, but there is reason to believe that DHHS decided that — because they can’t figure out how to separate out this particular type of information – they may have handed over the whole filing cabinet.”
The complaint is joined by state attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, along with the governor of Kentucky. Their coalition frames the issue as a widespread threat to Medicaid participants who expected program data to remain within health administration boundaries. That broad list underscores the political divide fueling the litigation.
News outlets reached out to the White House and HHS for comment as the legal fight proceeds, and the matter will ultimately be decided in federal court. Republicans will watch closely for how courts weigh enforcement needs against individual privacy, and whether the ruling preserves federal authority to use data in immigration and public-safety contexts.
Darnell Thompkins is a conservative opinion writer from Atlanta, GA, known for his insightful commentary on politics, culture, and community issues. With a passion for championing traditional values and personal responsibility, Darnell brings a thoughtful Southern perspective to the national conversation. His writing aims to inspire meaningful dialogue and advocate for policies that strengthen families and empower individuals.